Kindle Million Club - George R.R. Martin

[din155]

I loved the first two books of Demon trilogy (the painted man and the desert spear) by Peter Brett. Now what I hear is that it's not a trilogy anymore. It will be a big series of never ending books. I guess I am done with this series now.
I will not start with a song of ice and fire series before G R R Martin before he finishes with the last book.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by afa

In that regard, I think Brandon Sanderson does a good job. He always seems to work from a certain outline, and knows exactly how his books will proceed. And, of course, his output is remarkable.

Sanderson's output is amazing. He's a machine. He should be giving efficiency and priority clinics to other fantasy authors. The only strike against him is that I just don't really like what he writes. Sanderson is brick-by-brick world-builder and a complex, magic-system architect. I prefer World-hinting. I'll build the world from the author's subtle clues with my own imagination—and my imagination doesn't like being micro-managed with blueprints, complex-rules, info-dumps and minutiae (not that Sanderson is guilty of all of those).

Out of interest, who are some of your favourite Fantasy authors right now? Any recommendations? What about stand-alones? I haven't read a lot of those.

Some of my favorites include: Guy Gavriel Kay, James Blaylock, China Mieville, Tim Powers, and Joe Abercrombie. I'd like Patrick Rothfuss a lot more if he would get his raging case of diarrhea of the word-processor properly treated! I also enjoy Charles de Lint, K. J. Parker (whoever he/she is), and Michael A. Stackpole. There's also Neal Stephenson, Daniel Abraham and Felix Gilman. I can't believe I almost forgot Paul Kearney.

Some newcomers that I've been digging lately are Daniel Polansky, Mark Lawrence, Dexter Palmer, and Anthony Huso. I'm going to quit there.

For stand-alone fantasy; I'd recommend Stackpole's Once a Hero or Talion: Revenant... Kay's Tigana or Lions of Al Rassan... Powers' The Stress of Her Regard... or Blaylock's The Last Coin.

For me, my favourite is currently Joe Abercrombie.

I love Abercrombie, but I'm getting a little tired of the way he's

Spoiler:

pimping the Bloody Nine's alive/dead status. If he's dead... stop talking about him and move on. I can respect the symmetry of Logen's entrance and exit in the narrative. But if he's alive... then quit pissing around and start writing about him already. He was mentioned by name or by title almost 70 times in The Heroes.

Sorry for the long post.

[guyanonymous]

I wish more people would read the Wild Card series he edits.

[afa]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

The only strike against him is that I just don't really like what he writes. Sanderson is brick-by-brick world-builder and a complex, magic-system architect.

I don't think he's all that bad, really. Maybe it's because I would consider Jordan to be the brick-by-brick kind of guy, and Sanderson by comparison isn't nearly as guilty. In many ways, I think he strikes the middle-ground between Jordan's tedious minutae and, say, Abercrombie's barebones style of world-building (particularly in The First Law).

And I actually like his magic-system architecture. Virtually all forms of magic in Fantasy books is a variation of, I guess you could say, telekinesis. I actually enjoy the fact that he puts some effort into explaining how the magic *works* and, more importantly, the inherent limitations in the same. I feel it makes it a tad more believable (or as believable as something like magic can get).

Some of my favorites include: Guy Gavriel Kay, James Blaylock, China Mieville, Tim Powers, and Joe Abercrombie. I'd like Patrick Rothfuss a lot more if he would get his raging case of diarrhea of the word-processor properly treated! I also enjoy Charles de Lint, K. J. Parker (whoever he/she is), and Michael A. Stackpole. There's also Neal Stephenson, Daniel Abraham and Felix Gilman. I can't believe I almost forgot Paul Kearney.

Some newcomers that I've been digging lately are Daniel Polansky, Mark Lawrence, Dexter Palmer, and Anthony Huso. I'm going to quit there.

For stand-alone fantasy; I'd recommend Stackpole's Once a Hero or Talion: Revenant... Kay's Tigana or Lions of Al Rassan... Powers' The Stress of Her Regard... or Blaylock's The Last Coin.

Thanks for the recs. I shamefully admit that I am quite unfamiliar with many of those authors, but I shall now add them to my list of authors to check out. I've read Abercrombie (my favourite), Mieville (my least favourite), and have Rothfuss and Lawrence on my TBR list. Did you not like Rothfuss's (or should it be Rothfuss'? I hate writing names ending with s...) books? I've only ever heard good things about The Kingkiller Chronicle, and am really looking forward to reading it; now you're scaring me.

I love Abercrombie, but I'm getting a little tired of the way he's

Spoiler:

pimping the Bloody Nine's alive/dead status. If he's dead... stop talking about him and move on. I can respect the symmetry of Logen's entrance and exit in the narrative. But if he's alive... then quit pissing around and start writing about him already. He was mentioned by name or by title almost 70 times in The Heroes.

I agree. It doesn't bother me quite as much as it does you, but I've sort of wondered the same thing, particularly while reading The Heroes.

Sorry for the long post.

Would you be surprised if I said I like long posts?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Kubizo

What about Harry Potter? I can't believe that the highest selling saga of all times did not make a million in the electronic version!

Ciao!

What "electronic version"? There are no legal Harry Potter eBooks.

[Kubizo]

The Harry Potter books have not yet been released as eBooks.

Thanks for your reply! It's crazy though that they haven't.
Ciao!

[kennyc]

Potterville is coming:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011...launch-delayed


maybe.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by afa

I don't think he's all that bad, really. Maybe it's because I would consider Jordan to be the brick-by-brick kind of guy, and Sanderson by comparison isn't nearly as guilty. In many ways, I think he strikes the middle-ground between Jordan's tedious minutae and, say, Abercrombie's barebones style of world-building (particularly in The First Law).

I guess the time spent "learning" allomancy and "burning metals" just didn't do anything for me. I'm perfectly OK with the concept that; "magic can't be used willy-nilly and there are consequences if the wielder attempts too much, too soon." Anything more than that just tends to bore me and ultimately doesn't really help me "suspend my disbelief" any more/better(?). A few basic tenets are nice, but an entire framework is just overkill, IMO. It's still magic for pete's sake.

And for reference, I don't really consider Abercrombie to be barebones when it comes to world building (although he's a step in the right direction for me). So Joe would represent my personal middle-ground when it comes to world-building. I prefer closer to none actually. Just plop me down in the middle of your "world" please. Allow me to learn the rest through contextual clues (preferably contained within character dialog).

Read Lawrence's Prince of Thorns, Polansky's Low Town, and Huso's The Last Page if you're interested in getting an idea of the level of "world-building" I'm comfortable with.

I'm going to quote Mark Lawrence (Prince of Thorns) from a conversation in another thread, on another forum, in a galaxy far, far, away. It explains much better than I ever could, the way I feel about writing (regardless of the genre). I hope he doesn't mind. I'm spoilering them to keep the post length down (and also because not everyone is going to be interested), but they are definitely NOT spoilers. Emphasis mine.

Spoiler:

[caveat: the following is aspirational, what I aim for rather than do]

For me good writing is about economy. A good writer knows something about themselves, and by extension about the human condition, and by extension about you. That's why most kids aren't so good at it. Sure the bright ones can line words up and make them dance - but if they haven't lived, had the ups and the downs, then unless they're one in a billion they can't make that vital connection. For the greats (and everyone has their own examples - I like William Golding, Dostoyevsky, Hemmingway, Irving) they can hook out of the mature reader great tracts of the shared experience of being human. With the right line they can have the reader put all the requisite flesh on the skeleton. A few choice 'coup de prose' can ring the reader's bell and send echoes down the corridors of their experience. Take that too far and it becomes less and less accessible and we call it poetry. Do it right in a story and the smoke and mirrors of the writer becomes magic and genius. They do more with less - they put you there with deft touches rather than reams of description - they move you with one line rather than a page of failed entreaties.

High falutin' stuff for a hack who writes blood and guts fantasy, but we all have our dreams.

And also this one... which is in response to a reader wanting to know "more" about certain supporting characters:

Spoiler:

There's great power in restraint. Powerful writing is often powerful because of the way hints and hooks draw so much of a story or character out of the reader - in much the same way that a good artist can impart great character to a pen & ink portrait with just a few quick lines. Part of the impression left on a reader is there because of the questions left unanswered, the white space left unshaded. Turning too bright a light on that can destroy the magic. If you've read Hobb then the Fool would be a prime example of this. In truth a reader doesn't always want what they think they want.

It is of course possible to read the above as condescending and pompous - it's not meant to be.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I guess the time spent "learning" allomancy and "burning metals" just didn't do anything for me. I'm perfectly OK with the concept that; "magic can't be used willy-nilly and there are consequences if the wielder attempts too much, too soon." Anything more than that just tends to bore me and ultimately doesn't really help me "suspend my disbelief" any more/better(?). A few basic tenets are nice, but an entire framework is just overkill, IMO. It's still magic for pete's sake.

Whereas I love all that kind of thing. We each have our own tastes in these matters.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Whereas I love all that kind of thing. We each have our own tastes in these matters.

Oh exactly! And one of my loves is discussing everyone's individual tastes.

Others' opinions have often convinced me to persevere with books/series that I was ready to give up on, and I've often been able to convince others to give an author/book/series a shot that they otherwise would have avoided.

Surely that's what talking about books is all about?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

...

Surely that's what talking about books is all about?

It IS?

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by kennyc

It IS?

PART of what it's all about, then?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

PART of what it's all about, then?

No I agree, completely, just trying to make a joke.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by kennyc

No I agree, completely, just trying to make a joke.

I figured... but then I realized my statement was a tad too "all encompassing."

[ProfCrash]

Originally Posted by kennyc

It IS?

I thought it was to discuss which format was better? I prefer Mobi thank you very much.

I have been enjoying Sandersons's work. Robin Hobb is one of my favorites as well.